Do you want to improve your academic/non-fiction writing? If so, you’ve come to the right place. This post is aimed at authors of journal papers, technical web content or other non-fiction material, who want to produce top-quality writing.
While other posts have focused on simple proofreading tips for students and issues that are more relevant to those who are using English as a second language, this post highlights some common errors that I regularly encounter, even in text that has been written by experienced authors who speak English fluently.
Of course, there are a few overlaps between the lists, but this is because some of the issues are so common. This isn’t intended to be an exhaustive list of everything that an author needs to consider when writing a paper or report, but it should at least provide a few signposts for things to look out for.
The usual disclaimer: Writing styles and requirements will vary between publishers, institutions, industries, etc. Therefore, the list below is only intended as general guidance and should be read alongside any other specific instructions that are relevant to your work.
1. I/we/the author
Ensure that you refer to yourself (and any other co-authors) consistently. For example, don’t write “I used data provided by the Department of…” in one section and “We suggest that the results show…” in another. Instead, use I/my/me etc OR we/our/us etc throughout. Similarly, if you’re referring to yourself in the third person (“The author suggests that…”), then do so consistently – don’t mix it with I/we etc.
Alternatively, sometimes it might be preferable to avoid the whole I/we question. For example, you could say “The Department of [something] provided the data…” and “The results show…”.
2. Figures need to be referred to in the main text
If a figure (e.g. graph, map or photograph) has been placed within the text, it needs to be referred to in the main text. This can be as simple as “… (see Figure 1)” or “…, as shown in Figure 1”. This connects the text to the figure so that the reader can better understand the point being made.
Otherwise, you risk having a figure that is ‘stranded’ in the middle of the text, without any indication of its relevance or meaning.
3. Use a consistent tense
The choice of the preferred tense might vary depending on the situation (e.g. whether it is a journal paper, web content or technical report). But, whichever tense is chosen, it should be used consistently throughout. This isn’t to say that only one tense should be used within the whole document, but the predominant, narrative tense should generally remain consistent.
As a very simple example, don’t write “The results showed that…” followed by “The results also show that…”.
This is often a problem when describing the methodology of an experiment etc. Ensure that you are consistent in describing how the samples either are prepared or were prepared, for example.
4. Ensure text isn’t repeated
This should be easy to spot if you read your own work, but I often encounter duplicated sentences or even whole paragraphs. Often, it’s probably just a result of copying and pasting text from one place to another, and then forgetting to delete one of the instances. While I’m always pleased that the author has edited their own work and tried to improve it, I’m slightly less impressed by their apparent failure to re-read it!
5. Don’t begin a sentence with a number
Tolerance of this varies, but it’s generally considered good practice not to begin a sentence with a number – for example, don’t write: “100 people were surveyed…”. This issue can usually be resolved by simple rewording, such as “A total of 100 people were surveyed…” or “The sample consisted of 100 people who were surveyed…”.
(Note: It is generally OK to have a number at the start of a blog title!)
6. Be consistent with acronyms, initialisms and abbreviations
This is a very common problem with academic and corporate material, which is why I mention it in several blogs. Put simply, acronyms, initialisms and abbreviations should be defined when they are first used (e.g. “…at the British Geological Survey (BGS)…”). Then, use the acronym etc from that point onwards, although it’s not uncommon to see the full name/term used in subsequent headings.
7. Referencing
Last but certainly not least, we come to referencing. Without a doubt, this causes huge problems for many authors, which therefore results in more work for me. Put simply once again, use the chosen system of referencing consistently and correctly throughout. For example, don’t mix “A recent report by Baron (2022)…” with “A recent report1…” (i.e. the details of Baron (2022) are shown in footnote/endnote #1). Use either (a) author and year citations with a reference list at the end of the document, OR (b) footnote/endnote markers and references.
Paying attention to the little details is also very important. Does your chosen style require “(Baron, 2022)” or “(Baron 2022)”? If the page number is required, should it be “(Baron, 2022: 99)” or “(Baron, 2022, 99)”? If there are two authors, should it be “(Smith and Jones, 2020)” or “(Smith & Jones, 2020)”? (This list of examples is not exhaustive.)
Similarly, ensure that the entries in the footnotes, endnotes or references section are all consistent in terms of formatting and the level of detail. There are far too many things to check here so I’m not going to highlight anything in particular. Instead, I would encourage all authors to read up on their chosen system of referencing and then to go over their own references in forensic detail.
And finally, please don’t forget about putting the entries in your references section into alphabetical order, where appropriate. I would estimate that 95% of the documents I edit have a misplaced entry or two!
Consistency is key
By now, it’s probably clear that most of the points above relate to consistency. So, I would encourage you to do the required research first (e.g. regarding the chosen system of referencing) and then to methodically work through your text, keeping a very close eye on even the tiniest details.
If these guidelines are followed, it should go a long way to helping you produce a top-quality journal paper or document. Afterwards, it might also mean a lower cost for a professional proofread or edit of your material, because there will be less work for the editor!
